User talk:SanjayBeast
Multiple Things First, note that removing or modifying comments left by another user is an extremely bannable offense. You are not Mr. Mittens, and therefore, you have zero right to remove or modify their comments. Comments are the property of the user that left them an no one else is permitted to modify or remove them. Further violations of this policy will lead to a ban. Second, I am not doging your questions, I am simply trying to keep the page on topic, and it was you who was dragging it off. Since this is not that talk page anymore, I will say that if you reread the last portion of that comment, you will find your answer as I was quite specific about what I was referencing and what was being talked about. I give you fair warning, do not twist my words. Third, in the future, keep talk pages on topic. Do not drag talk pages off topic like you did in two separate instances. Lancer1289 01:02, May 31, 2012 (UTC) :Lancer, I am well aware of site policy regarding modifying comments left by another user - they are the same for every wiki. However, I am insulted that you think it is ok for you to come down on me like a ton of bricks over a matter that has already been peacefully explained and resolved between me and Mr Mittens. If you note, I explained what happened very clearly and calmly on the page, and he accepted it without question - any conflict that could have arisen was instantly quashed. We were both responding to the homophobic abuse at the same time, and so an edit conflict arose. Completely by accident, I deleted his comment (bear in mind, I had nothing to gain from doing so as his comment was in support of mine). Therefore I fail to see why you have got the impression that you need to and think it is ok to reprimand someone harshly even after they have resolved it and apologised. I would completely understand if I had deleted his comment (because it was against m ideas, or I hated him etc.) and then refused to apologise to him etc - it is common courtesy to admit to your mistakes, and I did so immediately after it was pointed out to me that I had messed up. On the other hand, I completely agree with your points regarding keeping talk pages relevant to the question at hand - it has annoyed me on other wikis in the past, and I am sorry that I started it this time and that it got out of hand. I am sorry that you feel I have been putting words in you mouth - it was not my intention to do so and you have every right to privacy about your vote and the reasons behind it. However I cannot find the last portion that you are talking about, could you link it to me? All in all, I am very sorry to have disrupted the talk page so much (not that it was just me) and it won't happen again. SanjayBeast 09:21, May 31, 2012 (UTC) :Some sort or response to this would be considered a common courtesy, especially if this was had face to face. However, I appreciate that you might have other, more important things like finals on your mind.SanjayBeast (talk) 17:14, June 4, 2012 (UTC) ::Lancer, you are really pushing my buttons. I have worked well with at least 12 admins on multiple wikis - they have always been fast to respond, polite and reasonable but not afraid of putting their feet down. You, however (and don't take this as a personal attack, I am just trying to make you see things from my point of view and my past experiences), have not only seemingly ignored my response to your reprimand, but have then seemingly ignored my request for a response and clarification. Whilst I would understand this if you were away/busy/forgot and therefore unable to be active on this wiki, it is the fact that you have made not only multiple edits, but also a whole blog in the time since I requested some response. I really did think that as someone who tries to take the upper moral ground in almost every argument I have seen you partake in, or at least as someone who appears to be very mature and eloquent , you would be a bit better than this, considering how many conversations similar to this one you must have had. So if you do get round to reading this, please consider what is regarded as common courtesy on every wiki and forum, especially for Sysops. Good Day, Sir. SanjayBeast (talk) 21:45, June 5, 2012 (UTC) :::You know what I am getting sick and tired of from you, is you making assumptions as you have done in ever case, and as you seemingly will continue to do. Did it ever occur to you that I missed your responses? Did it ever occur to you that other things might be going on? From your comment, which is nothing more than a rant and a personal attack, no. Did it ever occur to you to look at it from my point of view? Again, your comments seem to indicate not. I almost overlooked it this time. There are plenty of times where things get overlooked here, yet you are the only one throwing what you did in your last sentences at me. :::The only thing I see is hostility from you just because I missed something. Things get missed or overlooked all the time, yet you seem to think that it happens only with you. I am sick and tired of this attitude, and this way of thinking from you. If you did not get a response, then why did you not leave a message on my talk page about it? I would have been more than understanding as I have had it happen before in situations like this. Why did you not seek to contact me another way? The only thing I see here is hostility from you because you did not seem to look at it from any point of view other than your own. I have left messages on talk pages for users who have edited and they have gone unanswered, sometimes for months, and even then a few are left hanging there anyway for whatever reason. There are even things on my own talk page that I have missed for days, or even weeks because they get overlooked. Do not assume that you are alone because things like this do slip through the cracks at times, yet it seems that you assume that it is only because of you. Which is not the case. How about looking at it from some other point of view other than your own, which is all that you have been looking at it from. :::As to the points. Point 1 is left with '''everyone and anyone' who removes the comments of someone from a talk page. You are not in an exclusive vote. Anytime a breach of policy like that happens, it is dealt with in a similar manner. Everyone gets a warning, as that is accepted site practice. Even if the matter is resolved. So do not call me out for doing what is done every time in this situation. :::As to the third point, twice now you have pulled talk pages off of their intended topic. The first was on Talk:Krysae Sniper Rifle where you did nothing more or less than try and back me into a corner to get an answer, when there were much more appropriate places to do that. The second is on the Talk:Harrier Assault Rifle page. You keep drawing attention to something when it should have just been ignored and reported. You made comments there that had zero relevance to the overall topic. The topic was whether or not to move the page, not start a separate discussion about a comment which clearly was inappropriate and clearly should have just been ignored. :::I would say more, but anything at this point would just be restating what I have already said above. Lancer1289 00:03, June 6, 2012 (UTC) ::::Lancer, I am very sorry that I blew my top at you - I was just infuriated that it appeared like I was being ignored by you. However, your idea that I am 'only looking at things form my point of view' is completely false - I made allowances for your lack of response by saying that you could be revising for finals, or busy etc. In addition, your statement that i am making assumptions constantly is also incorrect - why would I bother to say 'I appreciate that you might have other, more important things like finals on your mind' if I thought you were simply ignoring me. ::::The reason that I did not respond on your talk page was that it says it bold red italics not to : ''PLEASE, if I left you a message on your talk page and you wish to discuss it, whether in part or in full, then please DO NOT leave me a message about it. Please reply on your talk page, don't worry I see it, - I don't know why, but for some reason you think that I should have completely ignored this very strong request of yours not to ask for a response on your talk page. In fact, I have done exactly as you asked - I responded to the question on my talk page, and then asked on my talk page for clarification. Whilst I appreciate that you have a huge amount on your plate, you say that 'don't worry I see it' and yet you said that things get missed (by you and others) all the time - this confuses me, as on one hand you say that you will get back to everything, and on the other you say that you miss responding to things a lot of the time. ::::Point 1. It is common practice on all the wikis I have been on to say to someone if something is going on their 'record' - i.e., if it has all been resolved peacefully, they get a warning but it is said to them that ' thanks for sorting it out without incident, and it will not go on your record'. This is because they have either made an innocent mistake that they immediately apologise for, or because a Sysop thinks that they handled the matter very well; i am not objecting to the breach of policy info (i never complained about it in the original response), merely questioning whether it will be put on my record as it was resolved instantly without incident, by me. :::::Point 3. Whilst I understand that I did make lots of the comments regarding both your apparent two sets of laws for different situations and the homophobic abuse, I stand strongly by the point that it is stupid to ignore vandals like that - thank you for banning him, I appreciate that. However, it is wrong on your part to assume that I was backing you into a corner (this implies, by the way, that you have got something to hide) - I was just curious (albeit far too curious) to know what the canon source of information was on this wiki. This is something that is highly relevant to a page talking about which source we should go by for the spelling of a word, the game or the dev. release, which was really what the dispute was about. I apologise (just as I apologised in my first response) for disrupting the talk pages so much. :::::Overall, I apologise for my general tone throughout this conversation (it has been very rude, and I should have kept it in line) but would ask that you consider my points, and the reasons behind my answers. SanjayBeast (talk) 08:53, June 6, 2012 (UTC) I am leaving this here to let you know that I read the comment, but apart from saying that apologies are accepted, and some reciprocated, I didn't see anything to comment on. Lancer1289 20:46, June 6, 2012 (UTC) :Thank you. Sabotage: Cloak explanation Hello there Sanjay, I understand your confused with what I said about using Sabotage AFTER using Tactical Cloak (without breaking stealth). So I will explain to you how this would work. When you use Sabotage on its own, you would usually wait 8 seconds (if we are going for an average recharge speed) as an example. When using Tactical Cloak, you obviously activate the power, and then the less time you spend in cloak, the less recharge time there is (Minimum of 3 seconds). Lets say Cloak has a duration and recharge speed of 10 seconds, the first 3 seconds have no effect on recharge time, but every second beyond that adds +1 seconds to recharge time. Using powers breaks the cloak, however long you spent in the cloak impacts recharge time, but if you use Sabotage in Cloak the cooldown will based upon the length of the cloak, NOT the Sabotage power itself. With this, you could literally have a roughly 30 second cooldown on sabotage, but use the Cloak beforehand, stay in it for a moment, then use sabotage and spend 1-3 seconds in cloak and it cool cool down in potentially THREE seconds rather than 30. In a nutshell, use cloak - use power (any), cloak breaks, however long you spent in the cloak impacts how long the cooldown is. JouninOfDespair 18:58, June 2, 2012 (UTC) Awesome! shame i don't like playing as the quarian infiltrator, but that sounds effective. Go ahead and re add it (without caps plz) in a form that anyone can understand, or i will then edit it so i think most people will understand. Thanks for staying cool about it SanjayBeast (talk) 19:03, June 2, 2012 (UTC) Clutch Situation Being in a "Clutch situation" is a common expression, at least where I live, in my "culture." There are other situations, but it's often the first one that comes to mind, for myself, when editing. And other expressions either aren't properly phrased to fit in situations (Adjective when an adverb is needed, noun when an adjective is needed, or verb when an adjective is needed, and some terms are just general phrases). In summation, "in a clutch" is just an easy-to-think-of, common, versatile phrase that can be used. "In dire situations" could be used, too I suppose. Anywho, I hope this helps. I heard the word clutch with drastic increase in frequency right before my sister stole my xBox (right before the Rebellion pack came out) Blaze55555 09:36, June 14, 2012 (UTC) *Whilst i fully under stand that it is an expression (and hence in Urban Dictionary with the same meaning that you give), it is confusing to players such as me who had not heard of it before. If we want to describe something, it is a lot better to use language recognised universally rather than slang that has not (yet) become that common everywhere - and believe me, I game a lot in the UK and had never heard someone use it before. Regards, SanjayBeast (talk) 12:31, June 14, 2012 (UTC)